General Election 2024

I loved one of the comments under that Obama video.

MATA - Make America Think Again.

Quote: rxwine

I loved one of the comments under that Obama video.

MATA - Make America Think Again.

Yes they'd been planning for a pandemic all along and Trump was wrong to say otherwise ...

what happened, though, illustrated how there's no substitute for experience. For example, they knew that the most likely disease was going to be respiratory, like the flu or SARS.... yet we instantly ran out of regular masks, gloves, hospital gowns, high-rated masks, and respirators.

I often reflect on how Trump could have said it better, or just kept his mouth shut.

I often reflect on how we need to do better than Trump or Biden

Quote: odiousgambit

Yes they'd been planning for a pandemic all along and Trump was wrong to say otherwise ...

what happened, though, illustrated how there's no substitute for experience. For example, they knew that the most likely disease was going to be respiratory, like the flu or SARS.... yet we instantly ran out of regular masks, gloves, hospital gowns, high-rated masks, and respirators.

I often reflect on how Trump could have said it better, or just kept his mouth shut.

I often reflect on how we need to do better than Trump or Biden

Trump was far from perfect. Way far. Biden's plan, implemented after nearly year of COVID, didn't work as well as he thought it would. That is the problem with plans in a emergency situation...as they say in battle planning, the plan changes soon after the first shot is fired. Some of the people who made that plan for Obama/Biden were still in the administration when COVID struck.

The immediate failure was the lack of PPE. A lot of the stockpile appears to have been used during the Ebola outbreak. It was not replaced and, based on the global nature of COVID, I wonder if anyone was really ready for the massive pandemic.

Yes, Trump could have still done better. No denying it.

I agree--Trump and Biden are the two poorest candidates we have had in a long time. Both have proven themselves unworthy of the job of President.

Oh, yeah, behind closed doors, Biden is the Energizer Bunny. Maybe he needs to let that show in public...

“Polling is broken”



I mean, how many elections now have Dems outperformed their polls?

"Polling is broken”


The New York Times published a poll two days ago with an especially egregious example of right-leaning oversampling.

The crosstabs for this poll indicate that 35% of the respondents live in rural areas. A reasonable amount for a 1954 poll, but bonkers for a 2024 poll when closer to 15% of the U S. population live in rural areas.

Quote: Tanko

Trump wasn't making up numbers, and he wasn't' lying. He was referring to the U-6 unemployment rate.

If the U-3 at the time was 7.8%, the U-6 was at least twice as high.

The U-3 and the U-6 unemployment rates are both released by the BLS each month, but the media prefers to focus on the U-3 because it looks better.

‘True unemployment’ is a lot higher than you think

The U-3 unemployment rate released by the BLS counts anyone who has worked at least one hour during the month as employed. It accounts for unemployed, but not underemployed and discouraged workers who have given up looking for work.

The U-6 is the truest measure of unemployment. Currently around 8%.

"The U-6 (Unemployment) rate measures the percentage of the U.S. labor force that is unemployed, plus those who are underemployed, marginally attached to the workforce, and have given up looking for work. The U-6 rate is considered by many economists to be the most revealing measure of the true state of the nation's employment situation."

When allowing data to enter our minds, it's important not to fill it with garbage.

Garbage in, garbage out, etc.

Most left-leaning sources are garbage, so I made an exception with this one.


There was a good link to get me to this link:

-----------------------

‘True unemployment’ is a lot higher than you think

05/31/2022
.
.
.
Just to recap: That means 60 percent of the adult population there either didn’t have a job, was working part-time but wanted full-time work or made less than $20,000 a year (below the poverty line).

Other areas that saw labor market conditions backslide in 2021 — Albany-Schenectady-Troy, N.Y., Springfield, Mass., and Columbia, S.C.

On balance, Ludwig said he found the data “a bit encouraging, but largely nervous-making,” as he thinks about what will happen as the Federal Reserve continues ramping up interest rates to cool the economy.

He’s not at all surprised that Americans are anxious, too.

“People may be poor, but they’re not stupid,” he said. “And they know that yes, things are a bit better. But they read the papers and things could well — with the need to control inflation – get a lot worse. And a lot worse can wipe out and more the little gains that have been made over the last several years.”
.
.
.
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-money/2022/05/31/true-unemployment-is-a-lot-higher-than-you-think-00035922

----------------------

Quote: alteredstates93

"Polling is broken”


The New York Times published a poll two days ago with an especially egregious example of right-leaning oversampling.

The crosstabs for this poll indicate that 35% of the respondents live in rural areas. A reasonable amount for a 1954 poll, but bonkers for a 2024 poll when closer to 15% of the U S. population live in rural areas.

Welcome.

It could be, the difference in the polling not matching the votes, are fraudulent votes.

The Democrats lost in the Supreme Court, which was widely thought to be the way it would turn out.

I doubt it is the way the immunity case will turn out.

Now Raskin and his band of idiots are going to try and push through a bill to meet the requirement the Court said would work.

A like the transparency--instead of beating Trump on the merits of their party and their candidate, they want to kick him off the ballot. I like it. Instead of allowing their declining candidate to face the buffoonism of Trump, they'd prefer a path to face someone sane who would run circles around the old fellow and is actually doing better in those untrustworthy polls.

At some point, you just have to wonder why the appearance of election interference that is turning off voters in the inaccurate polling that we have seen so far.

Everything that is called the "appearance of" may not be true but it is what a lot of people think is happening.

Maybe it is time to campaign and win.

Quote: RonC

The Democrats lost in the Supreme Court, which was widely thought to be the way it would turn out.

I doubt it is the way the immunity case will turn out.

Now Raskin and his band of idiots are going to try and push through a bill to meet the requirement the Court said would work.

A like the transparency--instead of beating Trump on the merits of their party and their candidate, they want to kick him off the ballot. I like it. Instead of allowing their declining candidate to face the buffoonism of Trump, they'd prefer a path to face someone sane who would run circles around the old fellow and is actually doing better in those untrustworthy polls.

At some point, you just have to wonder why the appearance of election interference that is turning off voters in the inaccurate polling that we have seen so far.

Everything that is called the "appearance of" may not be true but it is what a lot of people think is happening.

Maybe it is time to campaign and win.

Yeah, most thought it was "Hail Mary" attempt even if they wanted him off the ballot. I still think it sets up an interesting scenario where someone gets a pass simply to get elected because a trial doesn't have time to process in the time left. Because apparently that's what's possible. Doesn't seem like that would be right either.

Quote: rxwine

Yeah, most thought it was "Hail Mary" attempt even if they wanted him off the ballot. I still think it sets up an interesting scenario where someone gets a pass simply to get elected because a trial doesn't have time to process in the time left. Because apparently that's what's possible. Doesn't seem like that would be right either.

They failed to convict in the Senate after the impeachment. Had he been convicted, not allowing him to run would be a no brainer unless they passed a bill expressly allowing him to run. Chances of that passing would be slim to none.

If the DOJ had charged him specifically with "insurrection" and got a conviction, he would have been disqualified and again would have needed a bill to pass allowing him to run to get on the ballot.

I don't think any of the charges he is now facing will meet the requirement for removal from the ballot (or office).

If they have the goods, it would have been best for the DOJ to get the case that would automatically disqualify him to court before the election year.

I don't believe that anyone actually guilty of insurrection should get a pass. I also don't believe that some bureaucrat in a state can declare someone an "insurrectionist" and just take them off the ballot.

Again, I think it is time to get the candidates out there and run a campaign. If a guilty verdict comes down in a case, that is more ammo for the opponent to use against him.